is there a way a red alert notice can be incorporated in the main program that will activate and flash on the monitor once an unsual signal from a work unit is detected?

And to make this signal detection red alert more interesting, why dont S@H design an algorithm or program that will detect high-end extraordinary signals here on earth with the characteristics of the unusual "wow factor". Once detected by a work unit, a flashing red alert will pop up informing the user that an unusual signal was detected by the computer. From here, the end user like me can visualize, analyze and study these signals on the frequency-time-power display.

Another advantage of this feature provides us a clue that the BOINC software we are using is working as intended.

~Lawsinium~

"We live in an abstract world that created our physical universe." ~ Lawsinium

No. since your result has to be confirmed by repeated results in the same place in space. A single result is no indication of anything other than a result. Most WU's produce reportable results. This would be highly inconvenient and cause a flood of postings about results that are infact meaningless without corroboration In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Another advantage of this feature provides us a clue that the BOINC software we are using is working as intended.

BOINC is simply a framework that allows several projects to utilize spare computing cycles from volunteers all over the world. The mere fact that you are able to download and return work indicates that BOINC is working as intended.

BOINC should never have project-specific code such as alerting you to when SETI@Home has found a signal, as that would make the developers of BOINC look like they're biased in favor of that project. It is up to each project to announce the advancement they've made toward their goals via the front page or through BOINC's built-in "Notices" tab.

It doesn't matter whether the result is from outer space or from earth. What matter in this proposal is that we can train our eyes to detect specific signals generated by the "screensaver" on our monitor.

Just like yesterday, I was looking at a portion on the upper left hand chart and found out a speck of green light beaming out only from a certain work unit that is maximized to its top. What does this unusual green signal indicates? Since there are no alert system incorporated in the program, how will I know that an unsual activity is taking place in my workunits.

I also noticed that your z-axis labelled Time generates 8 seconds interval, sometimes a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 16, are these normal? How is the FTP chart subdivided in terms of coordinates? "We live in an abstract world that created our physical universe." ~ Lawsinium

It doesn't matter whether the result is from outer space or from earth. What matter in this proposal is that we can train our eyes to detect specific signals generated by the "screensaver" on our monitor.

I don't know that training our eyes to detect specific signals is a very good idea when the science application's mathematical algorithm is designed to do that work for us - much faster and more accurately I would add.

Just like yesterday, I was looking at a portion on the upper left hand chart and found out a speck of green light beaming out only from a certain work unit that is maximized to its top. What does this unusual green signal indicates? Since there are no alert system incorporated in the program, how will I know that an unsual activity is taking place in my workunits.

I also noticed that your z-axis labelled Time generates 8 seconds interval, sometimes a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 16, are these normal? How is the FTP chart subdivided in terms of coordinates?

You may find this site to be helpful in explaining what you're seeing in the screen saver graphics. The site I linked shows the old SETI@Home "Classic" screen saver, but the information is still accurate and applies to the new screen saver as well.

that nifty green line is the SETI@homes marker for suspected signals. For a triplet you'd get 3 green lines and Gaussians you'd get a nice bell shape. but my first response still holds. Your results are worthless unless they meet specific guidelines for what an ET signal should by our best estimates look like and repeated results are found in the same locationIn a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

" Your results are worthless unless they meet specific guidelines for what an ET signal should by our best estimates look like and repeated results are found in the same location."

You might be correct that a result will be useless if other parameters or guideliness in the project were not taken into consideration, like:

1. index of refraction .... the lens of an eyepiece can slow down the frequency of a signal. Atmospheric layers can slow it down as well. Not mentioning that a moving object can also make a signal fast or slow.

2. Rotation and revolution ... our earth is rotating and revolving at the same time. The milky way where the earth is at is also rotating. If another earth-like planet is on another galaxy situated and behaving just like the milky way ... then the possibilty to be hit by a space signal is very very slim like a needle in the ocean. At most it will be just be a single pulse... although the source is emitting a continous train of pulses.

3. Electromagnetic ... of course we know that em radiation from space cannot reach the surface of the Earth except at a very few wavelengths -- thats why we place telescopes in the peak of a mountain or mounted it in an aircraft or use an orbiting satellite so that these waves can be precisely detected.

4. Power source of the pulse from the alien planet ... the sun is a power source that emits photons which travel at the speed of light. But there frequency or wavelength just like other em radiations can only covers a certain length of distance and die downs. Thats why the sun inside a spiral galaxy could not illuminate what is inside an elliptical galaxy or anothe near-by galaxy.

Now, are the workunits we have in our screensaver in real time or these are old data dissected for analysis through our computers?"We live in an abstract world that created our physical universe." ~ Lawsinium

" I don't know that training our eyes to detect specific signals is a very good idea when the science application's mathematical algorithm is designed to do that work for us - much faster and more accurately I would add."

In any programming, there are two basic things that are needed: the program itself and the database. The algorithm may run fine but the information in the database may not, or it could be vice-versa.

Of course we are just talking of the "software" here which obviously does not exist at all. It is all but hardware! So how do you test the smallest resistor to the smartest integrated circuit with just an algorithm? Of course you know that programs are just a bunch of switches.

THanks, I will check the site.

"We live in an abstract world that created our physical universe." ~ Lawsinium

" The basic problem is that something like 99.999999% of all potential signals found are from right here on earth".

It might be true, but what matters here is if we can train ourselves to identify these signals, where are they emitting from, detecting their origin of source, what type of radiatons are these signals, studying the strength, behavior and envelope of their emissions and engaging the applied software used in this project to rigid testing, then I can really say that I have contributed something in the name of science.

And speaking of contribution, I have been contributing my time in translating a certain language here on this project ... but for the past few days I could no longer find the link. Any idea what happened to pootle?"We live in an abstract world that created our physical universe." ~ Lawsinium

Now, are the workunits we have in our screensaver in real time or these are old data dissected for analysis through our computers?

No, the data is not in real-time. The workunits are recorded onto hard drives at the satellite dish and then shipped to Berkeley to split up into smaller chunks. It's not uncommon for "old" hard drives to be split after newer hard drives; it's rather random depending on which hard drive they happen to grab.

In any programming, there are two basic things that are needed: the program itself and the database. The algorithm may run fine but the information in the database may not, or it could be vice-versa.

Of course we are just talking of the "software" here which obviously does not exist at all. It is all but hardware! So how do you test the smallest resistor to the smartest integrated circuit with just an algorithm? Of course you know that programs are just a bunch of switches.

There is another algorithm that checks the database for repetitive signals that are marked as "interesting". Still no need for human eyes at all.

It might be true, but what matters here is if we can train ourselves to identify these signals, where are they emitting from, detecting their origin of source, what type of radiatons are these signals, studying the strength, behavior and envelope of their emissions and engaging the applied software used in this project to rigid testing, then I can really say that I have contributed something in the name of science.

SETI@Home isn't that interactive. If you want to use your eyes to search for signals, you should check out the SETI Institute's (no affiliation with SETI@Home) SETI-Live.

If you want to contribute to the science algorithm to this project, there is a group of people who contribute their software writing skills to improving the software code and optimizing it for best performance on almost any given platform.

Otherwise, the only contributions to be given here are your spare CPU cycles, electricity, and some network bandwidth.

" Your results are worthless unless they meet specific guidelines for what an ET signal should by our best estimates look like and repeated results are found in the same location."

You might be correct that a result will be useless if other parameters or guideliness in the project were not taken into consideration, like:

1. index of refraction .... the lens of an eyepiece can slow down the frequency of a signal. Atmospheric layers can slow it down as well. Not mentioning that a moving object can also make a signal fast or slow.

This is a radio telescope - no eyepiece or other optics

2. Rotation and revolution ... our earth is rotating and revolving at the same time. The milky way where the earth is at is also rotating. If another earth-like planet is on another galaxy situated and behaving just like the milky way ... then the possibilty to be hit by a space signal is very very slim like a needle in the ocean. At most it will be just be a single pulse... although the source is emitting a continous train of pulses.

We can't see that far for any reasonable signal. We are only looking in this galaxy.

3. Electromagnetic ... of course we know that em radiation from space cannot reach the surface of the Earth except at a very few wavelengths -- thats why we place telescopes in the peak of a mountain or mounted it in an aircraft or use an orbiting satellite so that these waves can be precisely detected.

4. Power source of the pulse from the alien planet ... the sun is a power source that emits photons which travel at the speed of light. But there frequency or wavelength just like other em radiations can only covers a certain length of distance and die downs. Thats why the sun inside a spiral galaxy could not illuminate what is inside an elliptical galaxy or anothe near-by galaxy.

Now, are the workunits we have in our screensaver in real time or these are old data dissected for analysis through our computers?

Stored, broken into pieces and delivered in "box sort" order. (Whatever is on top of the box they are stored in.)BOINC WIKI